IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/revind/v55y2019i3d10.1007_s11151-019-09716-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Kaldor–Hicks Potential Compensation Principle and the Constant Marginal Utility of Income

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Martin

    (Purdue University)

Abstract

The Kaldor–Hicks potential compensation principle underlies partial equilibrium welfare analysis in imperfectly competitive markets. It depends on the assumptions that changes in consumer and producer surplus are weighted equally and that the marginal utility of income is constant. I show that if the first assumption is followed but there is decreasing marginal utility of income, the potential compensation principle does not give satisfactory indications of market performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Martin, 2019. "The Kaldor–Hicks Potential Compensation Principle and the Constant Marginal Utility of Income," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 55(3), pages 493-513, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:55:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s11151-019-09716-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11151-019-09716-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11151-019-09716-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11151-019-09716-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Victor Aguirregabiria & Margaret Slade, 2017. "Empirical models of firms and industries," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(5), pages 1445-1488, December.
    2. Anthony B. Atkinson, 2001. "The Strange Disappearance of Welfare Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2‐3), pages 193-206, May.
    3. Sacks, Daniel W. & Stevenson, Betsey & Wolfers, Justin, 2012. "The New Stylized Facts about Income and Subjective Well-Being," IZA Discussion Papers 7105, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Betsey Stevenson & Justin Wolfers, 2008. "Economic Growth and Subjective Well-Being: Reassessing the Easterlin Paradox," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 39(1 (Spring), pages 1-102.
    5. Milton Friedman, 1949. "The Marshallian Demand Curve," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57, pages 463-463.
    6. Layard, R. & Mayraz, G. & Nickell, S., 2008. "The marginal utility of income," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1846-1857, August.
    7. Stephen Martin, 2019. "The Potential Compensation Principle and Constant Marginal Utility of Income," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 383-393, September.
    8. Richard Easterlin, "undated". "Diminishing Marginal Utility of Income? A Caveat," University of Southern California Legal Working Paper Series usclwps-1004, University of Southern California Law School.
    9. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2002. "What Can Economists Learn from Happiness Research?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 402-435, June.
    10. Justin R. Pierce & Peter K. Schott, 2016. "The Surprisingly Swift Decline of US Manufacturing Employment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(7), pages 1632-1662, July.
    11. J. R. Hicks, 1942. "Consumers' Surplus and Index-Numbers," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 9(2), pages 126-137.
    12. J. R. Hicks, 1941. "The Rehabilitation of Consumers' Surplus," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 8(2), pages 108-116.
    13. Xavier Vives, 1987. "Small Income Effects: A Marshallian Theory of Consumer Surplus and Downward Sloping Demand," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 54(1), pages 87-103.
    14. Timothy N. Bond & Kevin Lang, 2019. "The Sad Truth about Happiness Scales," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(4), pages 1629-1640.
    15. Daniel T. Slesnick, 1998. "Empirical Approaches to the Measurement of Welfare," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(4), pages 2108-2165, December.
    16. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
    17. Harberger, Arnold C, 1971. "Three Basic Postulates for Applied Welfare Economics: An Interpretive Essay," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 785-797, September.
    18. Avner Offer, 2007. "The Challenge of Affluence: Interview with Avner Offer," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(2), pages 6-19.
    19. Amil Petrin, 2002. "Quantifying the Benefits of New Products: The Case of the Minivan," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(4), pages 705-729, August.
    20. Chipman, John S & Moore, James C, 1978. "The New Welfare Economics, 1939-1974," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 19(3), pages 547-584, October.
    21. George J. Stigler, 1950. "The Development of Utility Theory. II," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58, pages 373-373.
    22. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    23. Robbins, Lionel [Lord], 1981. "Economics and Political Economy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(2), pages 1-10, May.
    24. A. C. Pigou & Milton Friedman & N. Georgescu-Roegen, 1936. "Marginal Utility of Money and Elasticities of Demand," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 50(3), pages 532-539.
    25. Haavard Maridal, J. & Palich, Les & Morgan, Grant & Gardner, Steven & McKinney, Joe & Bolbocean, Corneliu, 2018. "Wellbeing Indices: A Comprehensive Inventory of Standards and a Review of Current Comparative Measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 1-11.
    26. Richard Easterlin, 2005. "Diminishing Marginal Utility of Income? Caveat Emptor," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 70(3), pages 243-255, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stephen Martin, 2019. "The Potential Compensation Principle and Constant Marginal Utility of Income," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 70(3), pages 383-393, September.
    2. Stephen Martin, 2019. "Economies as an Antitrust Defense: The Welfare Tradeoffs—Introduction to the Special Issue," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 55(3), pages 327-338, November.
    3. Daniel Bauer & Darius Lakdawalla & Julian Reif, 2018. "Mortality Risk, Insurance, and the Value of Life," NBER Working Papers 25055, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stephen Martin, 2019. "The Potential Compensation Principle and Constant Marginal Utility of Income," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 383-393, September.
    2. Tobias Pfaff & Johannes Hirata, 2013. "Testing the Easterlin Hypothesis with Panel Data: The Dynamic Relationship between Life Satisfaction and Economic Growth in Germany and the UK," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 554, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    3. Pfaff, Tobias & Hirata, Johannes, 2013. "Testing the Easterlin hypothesis with panel data: The dynamic relationship between life satisfaction and economic growth in Germany and in the UK," CIW Discussion Papers 4/2013, University of Münster, Center for Interdisciplinary Economics (CIW).
    4. Pfaff, Tobias & Hirata, Johannes, 2013. "Testing the Easterlin hypothesis with panel data: The dynamic relationship between life satisfaction and economic growth in Germany and in the UK," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79965, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    5. Easterlin, Richard A. & Angelescu McVey, Laura & Switek, Maggie & Sawangfa, Onnicha & Zweig, Jacqueline Smith, 2011. "The Happiness-Income Paradox Revisited," IZA Discussion Papers 5799, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Yuta J. Masuda & Jason R. Williams & Heather Tallis, 2021. "Does Life Satisfaction Vary with Time and Income? Investigating the Relationship Among Free Time, Income, and Life Satisfaction," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 2051-2073, June.
    7. Ozan Eksi & Neslihan Kaya, 2017. "Life Satisfaction and Keeping Up with Other Countries," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 199-228, February.
    8. Abel Brodeur & Sarah Flèche, 2019. "Neighbors' Income, Public Goods, and Well‐Being," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 65(2), pages 217-238, June.
    9. Yee Ngoo & Nai Tey & Eu Tan, 2015. "Determinants of Life Satisfaction in Asia," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 141-156, October.
    10. Cai, Shu & Park, Albert, 2016. "Permanent income and subjective well-being," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 298-319.
    11. Christos A. Makridis & Michael Ohlrogge, 2022. "Foreclosure spillovers and individual well‐being: Evidence from the Great Recession," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 50(1), pages 122-146, March.
    12. Tovar, Jorge, 2012. "Consumers’ Welfare and Trade Liberalization: Evidence from the Car Industry in Colombia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 808-820.
    13. Greg M. Allenby & Jeff Brazell & John R. Howell & Peter E. Rossi, 2014. "Valuation of Patented Product Features," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(3), pages 629-663.
    14. Steven T. Berry & Philip A. Haile, 2021. "Foundations of Demand Estimation," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2301, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    15. Rachel Griffith & Lars Nesheim & Martin O'Connell, 2018. "Income effects and the welfare consequences of tax in differentiated product oligopoly," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), pages 305-341, March.
    16. Johannes Vatter, 2012. "Well-Being in Germany: GDP and Unemployment Still Matter," RatSWD Working Papers 196, German Data Forum (RatSWD).
    17. Andrew E. Clark & Claudia Senik, 2010. "Will GDP growth increase happiness in developing countries?," PSE Working Papers halshs-00564985, HAL.
    18. Beja Jr, Edsel, 2013. "Does economic prosperity bring about a happier society? Mathematical remarks on the Easterlin Paradox debate," MPRA Paper 48229, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Jan-Emmanuel De Neve & George Ward & Femke De Keulenaer & Bert Van Landeghem & Georgios Kavetsos & Michael I. Norton, 2018. "The Asymmetric Experience of Positive and Negative Economic Growth: Global Evidence Using Subjective Well-Being Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(2), pages 362-375, May.
    20. Peter Davis & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "The flexible coefficient multinomial logit (FC-MNL) model of demand for differentiated products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 32-63, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Kaldor–Hicks; Potential compensation; Marginal utility of income;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:55:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s11151-019-09716-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.